Defense Minister

Defense Minister (in contrast to a Minister for the Prosecution)

More than two thirds of the front page of the Sunday Seattle Times was devoted to a profile of a defense attorney, John Henry Browne. The occasion for the coverage was Mr. Browne's signing on as counsel for the defense for Army Staff Sgt. Robert Bales, the soldier charged with killing 17 Afghan civilians. (Seattle Times, Sunday, April 8, 2012).

I read the head line, “Dynamic Defender,” the subtitle mentioning Sgt. Bales and the caption under the large photo: “John Henry Browne, 65, has been doing criminal defense work since the 1970s.”

I didn't have the stomach to read more. How can you defend someone who has killed men, women and little children in a horrific massacre?

But that is what defense attorneys do. In our system, it is the job of prosecutors to investigate and denounce human evil, human failings and to call for punishment. It is the job of defense attorneys to counter the accusations of the prosecutors. First, if possible, the defense attorney attempts to prove the accusations are false. Bobby didn't do it. He was somewhere else. You've got the wrong person. If that doesn't work, then the defense will argue Bobby didn't do it on purpose. It was an accident, a tragic mistake. The defense might argue it was self-defense. If none of that will fly, a last resort might be to argue insanity. Bobby was on medication. Or should have been on medication. Bobby was so traumatized by childhood abuse or his brain was so damaged in an automobile accident or his mind was so warped by the strain and chaos and trauma of war that he is not fully responsible for his actions.

Of course, the prosecutor will have none of this. Bobby did it. Bobby is fully responsible. Bobby must be punished—both because he deserves punishment and as an example to other potential wrongdoers.

There is a similar division among preachers. Some specialize in prosecution. They speak forcefully of human evil, human failure. They lament human nature. They insist damnation is the default destiny of humanity. Only a few will be rescued from this natural and miserable condition.

Other preachers are defense ministers. They specialize in grace and graciousness. They look for evidence of saving faith in people who are apparently unbelievers. They celebrate human goodness because it mirrors and illuminates divine mercy and generosity. They believe salvation is the default destiny of human beings. (If God is savior, do we expect him to succeed or fail in his job?)

I am unabashedly a defense minister.

Christian prosecutors often begin by calling Paul to the witness stand. They ask him if he really wrote these words:

As the Scriptures say, "No one is righteous— not even one.

No one is truly wise; no one is seeking God.

All have turned away; all have become useless. No one does good, not a single one." Romans 3:10-12. Paul is quoting from Psalms 14:1-3; 53:1-3 (Greek version).

"They rush to commit murder. 15

Destruction and misery always follow them. Romans 3:15-16

Paul is quoting from Isaiah 59:7-8.

"They have no fear of God at all." Romans 3:18.

Paul is quoting from Psalm 36:1

Paul answers, Yes, of course, he wrote these words. And even more than that, they are not just his own words. He quoted them from the Bible, from the Old Testament.

If we stopped here and rendered a verdict, we'd be ready to convict—ourselves, our neighbors, our friends in the church, our classmates at school, everybody: No one is righteous. No one is seeking God. They are all turned away. They are all worthless!

Who can argue? This is the clear word of God.

But then the defense calls David to the stand. David is the Old Testament prophet Paul cited.

The defense reads the passage Paul quoted, Psalm 14.

The LORD looks down from heaven on the entire human race; he looks to see if anyone is truly wise, if anyone seeks God. But no, all have turned away; all have become corrupt. No one does good, not a single one! Psalm 14:2-3

Defense to David: Did you really write this passage?

David: Yes.

Defense: Did you also write this:

The LORD judges the nations. Declare me righteous, O LORD, for I am innocent, O Most High! Psalm 7:8. (Note this is not justification in the classic Pauline/Augustinian/Reformed/Lutheran sense. The psalmist is not asking to “declare” him as righteous even though he is not. Rather the psalmist is asking God to acknowledge the reality of his situation: he is innocent. The RSV puts it this way: “The LORD judges the peoples; judge me, O LORD, according to my righteousness and according to the integrity that is in me.” This is not an “alien righteousness,” it is an inner, personally-owned righteousness and integrity.)

And this:

God is my shield, saving those whose hearts are true and right. Psalm 7:10.

David: Yes, of course, I did.

Defense: So how do you reconcile these two statements: “There is none righteous, no not one” and “Declare me righteous, O Lord, because I am innocent?”

David, laughing: If you are going to understand a writer, especially a poet, you can't just go with a few selected passages. Poets say things colorfully and forcefully to seize attention and provoke thoughtfulness. They never imagine that one poem will capture the whole of reality.

Defense: For the record, did you also write Psalm 14?

David: Yes, of course.

The Defense Minister reads:

The Lord led me to a place of safety; he rescued me because he delights in me.

The LORD rewarded me for doing right; he restored me because of my innocence.

For I have kept the ways of the LORD; I have not turned from my God to follow evil.

I have followed all his regulations; I have never abandoned his decrees.

I am blameless before God; I have kept myself from sin.

The LORD rewarded me for doing right. He has seen my innocence. Psalm 18:19-24.

Commentary: Wow! David says he had not turned from God to chase evil. David had followed God. David had followed all God's regulations. David claimed he was blameless. Obviously, David's statement, “there is none righteous, no not one,” needs to be balanced by his declaration that he himself was blameless and that he was part of a category of people “whose hearts are true and right.”

The defense minister calls Paul back to the stand.

Defense: “The prosecutor quoted you as saying, 'No seeks after God. . . . No one does good, not a single one.' Did you mean that literally or were you using poetic license?”

Paul: Didn't you read the end of my letter? The very people I was writing to, the church people in the city of Rome, were good people. I said so, plainly.”

I am fully convinced, my dear brothers and sisters, that you are full of goodness. You know these things so well you can teach each other all about them. Romans 15:14

I also affirmed the generosity of the church people in Greece:

For you see, the believers in Macedonia and Achaia have eagerly taken up an offering for the poor among the believers in Jerusalem. Romans 15:26.

In another of my letters I commented on the goodness of the church people in Philippi. They were so good, they deserved a reward from heaven for their generosity.

Even when I was in Thessalonica you sent help more than once. I don't say this because I want a gift from you. Rather, I want you to receive a reward for your kindness. Philippians 4:16-17

So obviously, I did not mean for my readers to take “no one seeks God” as a factual, literal statement.

Paul and David, the primary sources of the classic Pauline/Augustinian/Lutheran/Reformed prosecution of humanity, counter their own statements about human depravity with affirmations of human goodness.

But as great as Paul and David are, they are not the last word. That honor goes to Jesus.

Jesus did give strong rebukes. But this was exceptional. His normal pattern, the vast majority of his communication, was to encourage and to instruct. Condemnation was not his style. When the Pharisees accused Jesus to his disciples, Jesus shut them down. When the Pharisees accused Jesus' disciples to Jesus, Jesus shut them down. When an untouchable woman violated the law and touched Jesus, instead of rebuking her, he healed her, then publicly defended her violation. (Matthew 9).

When the Pharisees accused Jesus' disciples of breaking the Sabbath (an accusation that was rooted in the explicit words of God in the OT), Jesus defended his disciples. He based his argument in their defense on a creative and controversial interpretation of an obscure story in the OT (Matthew 12).

When the Pharisees accused the disciples of violating the ancient practice of handwashing before eating, Jesus dismissed the distinctive Jewish (religious) practice as trivial compared to the great moral principle of taking care of one's parents—a duty that Gentiles would recognize, and good Gentiles would practice (Matthew 15).

There is a pronounced pattern here: Pharisees condemn; Jesus defends. Religious zealots prosecute. Jesus defends.

I stand with Jesus. If other Christians feel they are called to stand with Jesus in those exceptional times when he did confront and condemn, who am I to argue with their calling. But my calling is to the ministry of defense.

I think most people are rather like the woman in John 8 who was surrounded by devout accusers. What she needed was a defender. Jesus explicitly rejected condemnation as a strategy in ministering to her. Before she gave any sign of repentance or even remorse, Jesus said, “I do not condemn you.”

When the woman sneaked into Simon's party and showed her affection and appreciation in a completely scandalous manner, Jesus defended her from the accusations that came from respectable, religious people—other guests at the dinner, the disciples, Judas. The “good people” scolding this woman for her failure to adhere to higher standards of decorum and life management joined Judas. Jesus joined the woman.

I stand with Jesus.

As a minister of defense.